TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] 160 M antenna

To: "'Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment'" <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] 160 M antenna
From: "Rick - DJ0IP / NJ0IP" <Rick@DJ0IP.de>
Reply-to: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2013 18:46:52 +0100
List-post: <tentec@contesting.com">mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
And I wish Heidi Klumm would drive up the driveway delivering my new
Porsche!

Jim, the problem is very simple.
We are asking for too much in one box.
The physical component requirements for tuning 160m are miles away from
those for tuning 10m.
Simply leaving 160m out of the ATU makes for a much cheaper and more compact
box.

In my opinion, the 160m tuner ought to be separate from the tuner for the
other bands.
In fact we really should have a tuner for 160 and 80m and a second tuner for
the other bands.
Reason:  Just look at the roller inductor settings for 40m and above, vs.
the roller inductor settings for 160 & 80m.  

In fact if at all possible, the 160m antenna should be separate from the
antenna(s) for the other bands.
Then the best thing to do it to match the antenna at the feedpoint with a
coil and capacitor.
That way all of your 160m antenna problems are solved.

73
Rick, DJ0IP


-----Original Message-----
From: TenTec [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Jim GM
Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 6:03 PM
To: TenTec-request
Subject: Re: [TenTec] 160 M antenna

Ten-Tec like other tuners have a hard time tuning 160M.  Any information on
this subject is very helpful.  I wish some one would sell a tuner that will
tune 45 foot to 300 feet of a single wire antenna without doing something
external to the antenna.

--
Jim K9TF
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>